[SteveReddin]

December 10, 2008 at 6:16 pm

thanks ciaran

[SteveReddin]

December 10, 2008 at 6:04 pm

Thanks for all the feedback, I think I’ll chalk this one up as one that didn’t work.

[SteveReddin]

December 10, 2008 at 5:58 pm

I think this is a fantastic photograph, not sure I’d be taking them as well underwater. I would trim out the very top left of the photo, there is something appearing there that is leading my eye, but other than that I think it looks great the way it is.

[SteveReddin]

December 10, 2008 at 5:50 pm

Hi Barry, I’d agree straightening it is the first step, anything slightly crooked does tend to catch the eye immediately, I think this is exaggarated by the flagpole which is already been held at a slight angle. I don’t think the original photography needs to be blurred to make the lead child stand out as he’s the only person present in the foreground.

There are a couple of spots to the left side of the Spire, I’d clone these out, they may have been birds or such, but are too small and lack detail to add to the picture.

There’s some lovely contrast in this photo, I particularly like the sunglasses when it obviously wasn’t sunny :)

[SteveReddin]

December 10, 2008 at 5:13 pm

Petethebloke,

I hope that this isn’t a comment directed to me that I’d not yet replied as I’d not been in a position to do so.

I do appreciate both the critique and feedback given by you or LoGirl but not your sarcasm which was neither requested nor helpful. I’d ask that any such future comments you feel obliged to make on my appreciation of any help given by you or other users are pm’d to me and kept out of the public domain. I don’t think comments reflect well on you and I’m sure they are not of general interest to users of this forum.

I’m sure you’ll understand that, although I came on now to reply, I’m no longer in a suitable mood to do so and will respond to the help you have given at a later date.

Steve

[SteveReddin]

December 7, 2008 at 5:10 pm

I’d agree that your current lens are suitable to begin portrait work, and I don’t think you really need to worry about filling any focal gaps in you lens selection, fortunately you can move the camera in and out rather than zooming.

I have two lens for portraits, a Sigma 75mm 2.8 (which is c. 100mm on my Canon) and a Canon 50mm 1.8. If you are keen on getting another lens for you camera, I’d suggest the Canon 1.8, which is about €140 I think I paid, is a nice addition and nicely suited to portraits and group shots.

The only point I would make other than that is that 100mm tends to be the most flattering focal length for portraits, or so I was led to believe when I was researching it, so if you are going to go into portraits in a big way, the Sigma would be a worthwhile purchase, although it does come with a €700 price tag.

Now, is it lense and lenses or lens and lens…..I’m going to wonder about that all day.

[SteveReddin]

December 7, 2008 at 2:35 pm

no, it was taken somewhere in Kildare, not sure of the exact address, I was randomly picking locations on my sat nav that I thought might offer me some photograph oppurtunites

[SteveReddin]

December 6, 2008 at 6:40 pm

I like this photo, the open field really balances the sky nicely. I’d suggest you remove the branch in the top right corner though, and there is a small mark in the top left that I’d say is on your sensor (from my experience that’s where they tend to be anyway. Fantastic clarity in the machinery in the foreground.

[SteveReddin]

December 1, 2008 at 4:45 pm

have you tried a graphic design studio that print marketing material, e.g. backgrounds for displays and such?

[SteveReddin]

December 1, 2008 at 4:43 pm

I sell some of my photography as limited edition prints, prior to this I did research on what it means, but there does not seem to be set rules. My gut feeling is that, when a photo is truely a limited edition, it should not be available as a print outside of the size of the edition run, i.e. the complete number of prints available as part of the edition.

Some photographers divide the negative up and include a piece with your photo, this will lessen the chance of another print becoming available, but I think you are still relying on the honesty of the photographer as they may have scanned the negative.

I would suggest you read carefully the CAO (certificate of authenticity) that comes with the photograph, if there is not one then I’d be more wary. My CAOs include as standard the title, size, year, number, print medium and the total edition size, as well as my signature. This information is then replicated on the back of the photograph to ensure they match. Certainly the CAO should clearly state whether the photo will be made available in other sizes as limited editions, which could well be argued are not the same as your edition. I’d also suggest a quick conversation with a private gallery curator on how they prove an item’s authenticity, they may be able to point out a few items you should look out for.

If you have seen another photo with the same number as yours I’d query the photographer and, I hasten to add this is a last port of call, a visit to a solicitor could be in order if you feel you have been mislead, particularly if you have purchased this as an investment.

[SteveReddin]

November 30, 2008 at 7:24 pm

Did you have the same giant smile on your face that I did when I realised I’d done it right?

[SteveReddin]

November 30, 2008 at 7:08 pm

Hi, I realise I may have come too late to this post but how and ever

I’m using a Bronica ETRS which is 645 MF for about a year now, and I have to say I love it and it’s simplicity. (There is something about going back to real film and winding the camera for me after using digital for so long, but I realise that’s not for everyone).

There are two points I would make though. Firstly I’d back Fintan’s suggestion that you don’t automatically go for a cheaper camera to try MF out, you may run into problems that would not be otherwise present in MF, but by which time you’d have been turned off the format, which, believe me, would be a real pity. For example, on cheaper cameras you can get vignetting on the photo (that’s a darkening around the edge of the photograph) when you are using a large aperture. You could have service issues if you want the camera cleaned at a later stage.

Secondly twin lens may be harder to use than single lens, as the lens you are looking through is slightly higher than the lens you take the photo with (one’s on top of the other) so you may get a few surprise elements in your photo that you didn’t see in the frame when you were taking it. If you are more used to 35mm / digital I’d suggest a single lens might be easier for you.

The only other point I would make is try and pick up a viewfinder with whatever camera you choose. Otherwise you’ll have to get used to taking reverse images as you only see off one mirror (although this is grand when you get the hang of it) and it’s awkward with a waist finder to turn the camera on it’s side if the photo required it.

I’ve never been disappointed with my Bronica, and on ebay they are cheap as chips, but, as they’re not made anymore, you might still have the service issues if you want it cleaned etc. Having said that, and despite hearing stories of shutters sticking etc, I’ve not had a problem with mine since I got it and I’d estimate it to be c. 10 years old at this stage, and to be fair, there’s not much to go wrong with them.

Best of luck whatever you choose, MF can be really rewarding and I don’t think you’ll be disappointed if you choose to try it.